SUPREME COURT MUST INTERVENE IN LIQUOR CASE ASKS BY ATIQA ODHO

0
427

Breaking News ISLAMABAD (Newz247) – The instruction for TV superstar Atiqa Odho, who is confronting the assertion of conveying alcohol, told the Supreme Court on Tuesday that no trial court was eager to manage her case on justify as a result of the dread that it was enrolled at the command of the apex court.

“All the trial courts dismissed her application for quittance on the ground that the trial is not yet completed and the issue will be chosen in the wake of shutting of confirmation of the charged in defence,” Barrister Syed Ali Zafar contended under the steady gaze of a three-judge SC seat headed by Justice Ejaz Afzal Khan, which had taken up Ms Odho’s application looking for orders for the trial court to choose her case on justify.

Ms Odho herself was available in the court.

In June 2011, then chief justice Iftikhar Mohammad Chaudhry had taken suo motu notice of Ms Odho’s release in spite of recuperation of two bottles of wine from her luggage. She was barred from loading up a Karachi-bound flight from Islamabad after the Airport Security Force allegedly grabbed the alcohol. Be that as it may, the ASF let her go, on the mediation of some ‘compelling figures’.

At that point the pinnacle court had requested the division worried to present a report in regards to Ms Odho’s discharge without enrolling a FIR, with a perception that her discharge was an act of discrimination.

On Tuesday, Ali Zafar reviewed that two cases taken in general society enthusiasm under Article 184(3) of the Constitution had then picked up conspicuousness – one identified with his customer and the other about sugar value climb.

He contended that Ms Odho had been embroiled in a false case because of the suo motu activity that too depended on news reports.

He said that during the suo motu procedures orders had been issued to the experts worried to enlist a FIR against Ms Odho for purportedly conveying the alcohol.

Mr Zafar contended that the body of evidence against his customer was false and trivial and after the arraignment finished up its confirmation which was clear that no argument had been made out against her. Up until now, he stated, the announcements of eight witnesses had been recorded for the situation.

“As needs be, she is qualified for absolution under the arrangements of Section 265-K of the Criminal Procedure Code,” the guidance stated, including that the trial court ought to have discarded her application on justify, rather than putting off the choice on specialized grounds.

In the wake of hearing the contentions of the insight, the Supreme Court issued notification to the state and coordinated the trial court not to pass any request till a choice working on it.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here